[NSRCA-dist8] Classic Pattern

Wed Feb 19 19:55:03 AKST 2014

Wow, good thing retracts are allowed...Jim and I would have to bow out and
go drink beer!
It is almost time for Gordons timeless rant..."Shut up and fly"!!!!
On Feb 19, 2014 8:52 PM, "Gordon Anderson" <gaa at owt.com> wrote:

> oh, yeah.... AMEN!
>
> On Feb 19, 2014, at 8:48 PM, Patrick Harris <harris7148 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Gordon,
>
> That's great info.
>
> Long story short, my original criteria pretty much holds to what they are
> doing.
>
> No year restrictions
>
> 60 class planes or smaller
>
> 6 cell maximum for electrics
>
> Gary recommended adding Pipes and Retracts allowed.
>
> Can I get an AMEN
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
>> Here is some input from Tony in D7 that may help:
>>
>> Hi Gordon,
>>
>> Mike forwarded to me your questions about Classic.
>>
>> In this region, we feel Classic is more about the old-style patterns then
>> about technicalities regarding models. We have allowed pretty much
>> anything, but would definitely frown on a 2-meter pattern model entering.
>> But we have had 62" Osiris', Sequences, Elements, and the like enter.
>> Models like the Venus or Venus II have flown. In the Pre-Novice and Novice
>> it is much more about getting guys to do it. So we have allowed almost
>> anything in those classes. In advanced there have been mostly "Classic"
>> models. And in Masters all have been Classic.
>>
>> As to the exact definition of a "Classic" model, we have stayed away from
>> doing much there. Same with engine/power systems. Since companies like O.S.
>> don't even make a .61 anymore, we haven't made that distinction. As I said,
>> much more about the flying then the models.
>>
>> I hope this helps! If you have any more questions feel free!
>>
>> Tony Frackowiak
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 19, 2014, at 5:37 PM, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>  Yes!
>>
>> Eliminating the year eliminates the need for certification or differences
>> of opinion.
>>
>> I think there were several 120 designs such as the 2 plus 2 which were
>> approximately a 2M airplane flying prior to TA. Maybe a NATS equipment list
>> exists from about 1989. If I get bored tonight maybe I'll look fore one.
>>
>> I don't know that I'd encourage the Option-120 although it certainly
>> could have existed in the 80's, it didn't. However the 60 size Option-3, a
>> simple fixed gear design did and it flew well with a muffler or piped 60 /
>> 61 or 91 four stroke.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [
>> mailto:nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
>> ]*On Behalf Of *Patrick Harris
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 5:08 PM
>> *To:* AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY
>> *Cc:* Gary McClellan; Ray Gauthier; Arthur F. Kelly; Rudy; Rick Bergeron
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-dist8] Classic Pattern
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> That's pretty much in line with what Ray had to say, which is to limit it
>> to "aircraft designed to fly pattern that were originally intended for glow
>> engines. These same period aircraft can be currently powered by electric
>> motors.
>>
>> Is this in line with your thinking?
>>
>> This eliminates the "year" issue.
>>
>> Gary did bring up an issue with 120 sized planes like the Option 120.
>> Although not truly classic, these type of planes were indeed used in pre
>> turnaround were they not?
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Pat I gave that some thought last night.
>>
>> Traditional classic / ballistic aircraft were GLOW POWER designs. There
>> may be an electric power exception but very rare and specific.
>> We were to restrict it to these period glow power designs ore electric
>> conversions.
>> Just a thought!
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
>> nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]*On Behalf Of *Patrick Harris
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:41 PM
>> *To:* Gail & Robert Walker
>> *Cc:* Gary McClellan; AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY; Ray Gauthier; Arthur F.
>> Kelly; Rudy; Rick Bergeron
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-dist8] Classic Pattern
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Under the laid out guide line, I would say Yes it would be OK, but the
>> intent is to keep it to Old School. To me a 3D ARF of modern design does
>> not fit the "Old School" criteria. This stuff isn't in stone so we can
>> still adjust as we go. Any thoughts from everyone on how to write this is
>> most appreciated. Like Jim, said we don't want to alienate anyone, but we
>> do need some sort of guideline.
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Gail & Robert Walker <grbwii at comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>  Pat,
>>   Just checking, but would that mean that I could use my electric
>> Katanna(SP)? You say it fly at Dusters the other day. I would have to tone
>> the throws down a bit, but it seems to fit your specs?
>>               Bob W
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Patrick Harris <harris7148 at gmail.com>
>> *To:* Ray Gauthier <rc.gauthier at comcast.net>
>> *Cc:* AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY <nsrca-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org> ; Brad Burden<bburden1959 at gmail.com>
>>  ; Bob Walker <grbwii at comcast.net> ; Rudy <whyRudy at comcast.net> ; Rick
>> Bergeron <ribergeron at comcast.net> ; alan wellentin<a_wellentin at yahoo.com>
>>  ;Arthur F. Kelly <afkelly25 at gmail.com> ; Bill Carder <BC3662 at aol.com> ; Gary
>> McClellan <gary at raystowing.com>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 12:21 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: Classic Pattern
>>
>> Very cool
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Raymond C. Gauthier <
>> rc.gauthier at comcast.net> wrote:
>>  A pic of the Dalotel is attached.  Pretty cool eh?
>> __________________________________________
>>
>> I'm hoping I have something old hanging in the garage that would fill the
>> bill.  I know I have a scale French aerobatic airplane, a Dalotel, which is
>> the right size and pretty much in flyable (wet power) condition.  When I'm
>> back in town I'll have to dig it out and see how it flies the Novice
>> pattern.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Patrick Harris [mailto:harris7148 at gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 12:53 PM
>> *To:* Ray Gauthier
>> *Cc:* AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY; Brad Burden; Bob Walker; Rudy; Rick
>> Bergeron; alan wellentin; Arthur F. Kelly; Bill Carder; Gary McClellan
>> *Subject:* Re: Classic Pattern
>>
>> Ray,
>>
>> Yes. By saying 60 size that pretty much limits you to pre 80's planes.
>> Are we going to turn away a guy that walks up with a little Osiris? The way
>> it's written, no we wouldn't turn him away, but I think this is going to be
>> a non issue or infrequent if at all. . We need to keep this real simple and
>> have fun.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Raymond C. Gauthier <
>> rc.gauthier at comcast.net> wrote:
>> Does no year restrictions mean any airplane that fits the size and power
>> guidelines?
>>
>> *From:* Patrick Harris [mailto:harris7148 at gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 11:47 AM
>> *To:* AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY; Brad Burden; Bob Walker; Ray Gauthier;
>> Rudy; Rick Bergeron; alan wellentin; Arthur F. Kelly; Bill Carder; Gary
>> McClellan
>> *Subject:* Classic Pattern
>>
>> Just a quick update. I have had a few question from a couple of CD's in
>> regards to Classic pattern this year. The bottom line is we do this is to
>> have fun and we don't want to load this up with a bunch of rules.
>>
>> Long story short, here are the only criteria. Keep in mind we will likely
>> tweak this as we go:
>>
>> No year restrictions
>>
>> 60 class planes or smaller
>>
>> 6 cell maximum for electrics
>>
>> That's it. We will fly two schedules this year which are Novice and
>> Advanced which can be found here;
>>
>> http://www.classicpatternassociation.com/uploads/CPA_call_card.pdf
>>
>> At some of our contest we will fly classic Saturday and Sunday in the
>> mornings due to sun issues (Woodburn, Redmond). At fields like Molalla that
>> we can fly turnaround by 8:00, we will fly classic on Saturday after
>> turnaround and it's the discretion of the CD to fly classic on Sunday. My
>> guess is for those fields we will fly classic on Saturday only to get guys
>> on the road Sunday.
>>
>> Also, Gordon has been at it again with a great new feature on the D8
>> site. No longer will you have to search in vane for upcoming events to
>> preregister on the NSRCA calendar. All you will need to do is click on the
>> 2014 schedule on the D8 site and you will find an info link and a link to
>> the calendar for preregistration. By the way, it is a great help to the
>> CD"s and Gordon to preregister to all contest you plan to attend. Again, my
>> thanks to Gordon. Without him, we wouldn't be where we are.
>>
>> If you have questions or concerns, email or give me a call.
>>
>> 503-454-0381
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>  <http://www.avast.com/>
>>
>> This email is free from viruses and malware becauseavast! Antivirus<http://www.avast.com/>
>>  protection is active.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
>> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
>> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
>> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-dist8/attachments/20140220/6d37d1cb/attachment.html>